The accusation that Mishima, Tanizaki, and Kawabata “aestheticized” Japan as a land of geisha and beautiful landscapes feels rather absurd to me. These writers were simply creating literature to express their inner worlds and artistic visions. If they had to constantly worry about political implications or how foreigners might perceive Japan through their work, it would place an unhealthy constraint on future authors as well.
That said, as Hibbett briefly implies, translators and publishers inevitably carry this political burden — something I had never considered before, but which makes complete sense. Most foreign readers can only access Japanese literature through translation, meaning their image of Japan is shaped by what gets selected and how it is rendered. Still, I also think it’s unreasonable for foreign readers to let literature define their entire perception of Japan.
That said, as someone who once imagined the United States as a clean, glamorous place—an image formed mostly from watching Hollywood films—I also understand how media, let it be films, literary works, or news can shape one's perception of foreign countries (which they cannot easily travel to).
So, it brings me back to Hibbett's and my point: translators and publishers hold real responsibility, as they mediate not just words, but entire cultural imaginations.
Marcus
No comments:
Post a Comment